Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2013 12:18:04 -0700
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>, Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch.pl: Check for the FSF mailing address
Message-ID: <20131006191804.GB27140@kroah.com>
References: <20131005184307.GA6429@leaf>
 <1380999108.2081.138.camel@joe-AO722>
 <20131006062739.GA5218@kroah.com>
 <1381042912.2081.146.camel@joe-AO722>
 <20131006070557.GA1679@kroah.com>
 <20131006081033.GA18109@pd.tnic>
 <20131006134404.GB4706@kroah.com>
 <20131006135507.GA18082@pd.tnic>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20131006135507.GA18082@pd.tnic>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2030
Lines: 46

On Sun, Oct 06, 2013 at 03:55:07PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 06, 2013 at 06:44:04AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 06, 2013 at 10:10:33AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 06, 2013 at 12:05:57AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > As an individual file is not the sum of the "program", I would argue
> > > > that it is not needed, but some companies like to feel better by
> > > > adding it. So I really don't mind either way, as it would involve
> > > > arguing with lawyers about this type of thing, and I do enough of that
> > > > already that I don't go out of my way to do it more...
> > > 
> > > What about a short sentence pointing at 'COPYING' instead?
> > 
> > Why?  What would that do?
> 
> Save us the short one or two lines "this file is ..."
> 
> > Listen, all we really need is a short one or two line "this file is
> > released under the FOO license" in the file.  The SPDX project has the
> 
> All I'm suggesting is that it might be even simpler to add
> 
> "See COPYING in the kernel source repository for the license of this file."
> 
> or a similar text as COPYING contains the full text of the license.
> Basically a pointer to it.

You can do that, but I know a whole lot of lawyers who will not like
that, as you aren't being explicit about what the license of the file
is, and relying on something else.

Remember, Linux kernel source files are licensed with all sorts of
different licenses, all of which are compatable and default to GPL when
used as a whole, but can be different on their own.

> This has the added advantage to your short line that it points to the
> exact license text and lawyers are happy.

Lawyers, just like kernel developers, are never happy, it's not in their
nature...

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/